Tag Archives: Hearsay

25 March 2013: ICT-2 Daily Summary – Kamaruzzaman Prosecution Closing Arguments

Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Chief Prosecutor vs. Muhammad Kamaruzzaman

The day’s proceedings began later than usual due to the late arrival of senior Prosecutor Saiful Islam. The court sat at 10:35 A.M but adjourned for half an hour after waiting for the Prosecutor to arrive. After his arrival the Tribunal reconvened and chastised the Prosecutor for his tardiness. They warned that he would face sanctions if similar incidents occured in the future.   The prosecutor then moved on to address the evidentiary aspects of each of the charges against Kamaruzzaman.

Charge 1:  Torture and murder of Badiuzzaman
Date of Occurrence: 29 June 1971 and 30 June 1971.
Place of Occurrence: Ahammad Nagar Army Camp
Witnesses in support of the Charge: Prosecution witnesses  4 and 6.

Both the prosecution witnesses in support of this charge provided testimony based on hearsay evidence. Prosecution witness 6 additionally gave testimony in relation to some circumstantial evidence. The testimony of Prosecution witness 4 involves multiple hearsay, meaning that the information was relayed through more than one person before being received by the witness. Prosecution witness 6 testified that Kamaruzzaman accompanied the group who abducted the victim. The Prosecution argued that they have evidence showing that the accused led the group. However, the judges stated that  such evidence would not be of high significance because Charge 1 against Kamaruzzaman is not framed under Section 4(2) of the ICT Act of 1973, which provides for liability due to command responsibility.

Continue reading →

14 March 2013: ICT 1 Daily Summary – Gholam Azam Defense Closing Arguments

The Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Chief Prosecutor vs. Gholam Azam – Defense Closing Arguments

On 14 March 2013 Defense Counsel Mizanul Islam continued the closing arguments for the 4th day. Thereafter, Tribunal adjourned the proceedings of the Gholam Azam’s case until 18 March 2013.

After the lunch break the Prosecution introduced new Prosecutor Turin Afroz to the Judges of the Tribunal 1. The Chairman said that Tribunal 1 would hear arguments from Prosecutor Turin Afroz and Defense Counsel Imran Siddique for one hour on 18 March regarding the issue of whether a civilian can have superior command responsibility.

Continue reading →

12 March 2013: ICT-1 Daily Summary: Gholam Azam Defense Adjournment, Chowdhury PW 21, Mubarak Hossain Cognizance of Charges

12 March 2013: ICT-1 Daily Summary

The Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Chief Prosecutor vs. Gholam Azam –  Defense Closing Arguments
  2. Chief Prosecutor vs. Salauddin Qader Chowdhury –  Testimony of PW 21
  3. Investigation of Mubarak Hossain – Cognizance of Charges

On March 12, 2013 a junior Defense counsel for Gholam Azam sought adjournment saying that senior Defense attorney Mizanul Islam could not attend due to the personal difficulties. The Tribunal accepted the Defense prayer and adjourned the proceedings of the Gholam Azam’s case until March 13. The charged the Defense taka 1,000 for the cost of the delay.

The Tribunal took cognizance of the formal charge against Mubarak Hossain and ordered him to be detained in jail, rejecting the Defense request for an extension of bail. The Tribunal fixed 4 April 2013 for the next date of hearing.

In the Chowdhury case Prosecution witness 21, Abul Bashar, testified before the Tribunal. Thereafter, Tribunal adjourned the proceedings of the Chowdhury case until 18 March 2013.

Continue reading →

Weekly Digest Issue No. 2 January 27-31

This week’s proceedings were dominated by the completion of Closing Arguments in the Sayedee case, heard by Tribunal 1. The Defense presented legal arguments regarding delay in prosecution, malafide intent, the elements of the crimes, and the value of out-of-court statements admitted into evidence under Section 19(2) of the ICT Act. The Prosecution submitted its reply and requested the death penalty against the Accused. The case is now under review and awaiting the Tribunal’s judgment.

Tribunal 2 had a light week, primarily dealing with administrative and evidentiary applications. They additionally heard arguments in pending contempt proceedings.

Read the full report here: Weekly Digest Issue No. 2 – Jan 27-31 

17 Feb 2013: ICT-1 Daily Summary- Gholam Azam Closing Arguments, Chowdhury Cross-Examination of PW 20

Today the Tribunal heard matters in the following cases:

  1. Chief Prosecutor vs Gholam Azam: Hearing of 3 Applications, Beginning of Prosecution Closing Arguments (Accused not Present)
  2. Chief Prosecutor vs Salauddin Quader Chowdhury: Cross-examination of PW 20 (Accused Present)

In the case of Gholam Azam the Tribunal heard three applications filed by the Defense regarding the presentation of further defense witnesses, permission to produce expert foreign witnesses, and a request for bail. The Tribunal rejected the first application and said it was not necessary to address the second two applications at this time. At that point they instructed the Prosecution to begin its Closing Arguments. Chief Prosecution Gholam Arief Tipo began with the historical background of the Liberation War. Thereafter, Tribunal adjourned the proceedings of the Gholam Azam’s case until tomorrow, February 18th.

In the afternoon the Tribunal heard the conclusion of the Defense’s cross-examination of Sheikh Morshed Anwary, prosecution witness 20. Salauddin Quader Chowdhury himself conducted the end of the cross-examination. Continue reading →